Need camera for a professional knitter
March 2, 2010 11:41 AM Subscribe
Help me find a digital camera for a professional knitter, with certain limitations in mind.
My SO is (among other things) a popular blogger and author on knitting and related crafts. She needs a new digital camera since she recently lost hers, and photos are a really important part of her website. Please recommend some with these parameters in mind...
The User:
She's got a good eye, but she is not technical at all. She's pretty much developed her own style of taking good photos without any training or anything. She just turns knobs until she likes the way things look. Despite me bugging her to learn about f-stops and shutter speeds, she's probably just not going to get into that. Changing lenses is not going to be her thing -- too complicated, and also she wants the thing to be easily transportable.
The types of photographs she takes:
Usually the photos are close-ups of static items (knitting projects) or domestic scenes (people cooking, kids, etc). The most common problems she has had in the past with her photos are getting good focus in those closeups, and in the conditions of low natural light we typically have in our house. The photos are typically "published" only on her website and other web venues, so print resolution is usually not required. For her/our books a professional photographer is hired by the publisher.
The price
$300 to $500, preferrably on the lower side of that. It that sounds a bit low, please note that: a) knitting is not a lucrative profession; and b) she has taken lovely photos with cameras costing $100 and $350. c) We're not careful people; we tend to lose things!
Thanks so much!
My SO is (among other things) a popular blogger and author on knitting and related crafts. She needs a new digital camera since she recently lost hers, and photos are a really important part of her website. Please recommend some with these parameters in mind...
The User:
She's got a good eye, but she is not technical at all. She's pretty much developed her own style of taking good photos without any training or anything. She just turns knobs until she likes the way things look. Despite me bugging her to learn about f-stops and shutter speeds, she's probably just not going to get into that. Changing lenses is not going to be her thing -- too complicated, and also she wants the thing to be easily transportable.
The types of photographs she takes:
Usually the photos are close-ups of static items (knitting projects) or domestic scenes (people cooking, kids, etc). The most common problems she has had in the past with her photos are getting good focus in those closeups, and in the conditions of low natural light we typically have in our house. The photos are typically "published" only on her website and other web venues, so print resolution is usually not required. For her/our books a professional photographer is hired by the publisher.
The price
$300 to $500, preferrably on the lower side of that. It that sounds a bit low, please note that: a) knitting is not a lucrative profession; and b) she has taken lovely photos with cameras costing $100 and $350. c) We're not careful people; we tend to lose things!
Thanks so much!
I would go for a point and shoot with macro mode and a decent lamp. You really don't want to be taking close-up flash photographs. In fact, a good rule of thumb is just never to use the flash at all. (Yes yes, if you know what you're doing, the flash can be a useful tool. But most amateur photographers don't know how to use it effectively).
Ideally she'd get a digital SLR with one all-purpose lens and one macro lens for closeups. But given the budget and your other criteria, I don't see why a nice 10MP or so point and shoot won't work just as well. Find one with positive reviews for the macro mode, and spend the extra dough on an umbrella flash or some other nice lighting setup if light is a constant problem.
posted by jckll at 11:53 AM on March 2, 2010
Ideally she'd get a digital SLR with one all-purpose lens and one macro lens for closeups. But given the budget and your other criteria, I don't see why a nice 10MP or so point and shoot won't work just as well. Find one with positive reviews for the macro mode, and spend the extra dough on an umbrella flash or some other nice lighting setup if light is a constant problem.
posted by jckll at 11:53 AM on March 2, 2010
Response by poster: Here's a detail I should have emphasized in the original post: she pretty much just uses natural light. I've often thought that the camera we had before just wasn't sensitive enough, because of the low light conditions we have inside (we live in the Pacific Northwest). Perhaps that helps.
posted by martin2000 at 11:56 AM on March 2, 2010
posted by martin2000 at 11:56 AM on March 2, 2010
There are myriad cameras out there that can do what she wants. My wife has a couple of sites (Etsy, TDIPT, etc.) where she sells her work. The issues I feel you need to address are whether she has or wants to learn any photo-editing skills, or whether she just wants to point and shoot. The way my wife bought her third camera was to go to WalMart and hefted each one of the cameras on display. She was looking for weight (not too much), buttons (not too many) and view screen (not too small). Then she went home and searched for consumer and user critiques of the ones on her narrowed-down list. One feature that has been beneficial is the "close-up" setting that allows her to get within 20 inches or so of her work, while I like to "borrow" it and take landscape photos with the "close-up" setting turned off.
If all of this is too confusing, go to a good camera store and ask the photography geek behind the counter for help, with the same "I'm not interested in f-stops and lenses" info. You'd be surprised how helpful someone who is actually a photographer can be.
posted by Old Geezer at 11:57 AM on March 2, 2010
If all of this is too confusing, go to a good camera store and ask the photography geek behind the counter for help, with the same "I'm not interested in f-stops and lenses" info. You'd be surprised how helpful someone who is actually a photographer can be.
posted by Old Geezer at 11:57 AM on March 2, 2010
Look for something like this camera. You want something with a large lens to let in more light. This also has stabilized zoom and macro mode. Price in Cart at Amazon is currently $395.95.
posted by studentbaker at 12:11 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by studentbaker at 12:11 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
Here's a pretty useful decision tree for choosing a digital camera.
And echoing what adamrice said, my photography class teacher just raved about the G11 being a fantastic camera.
posted by ambrosia at 12:36 PM on March 2, 2010
And echoing what adamrice said, my photography class teacher just raved about the G11 being a fantastic camera.
posted by ambrosia at 12:36 PM on March 2, 2010
Almost any major-brand compact will do fine. For someone nontechnical who just wants to take pictures, you really don't need to overthink this. If you can get her to turn the flash off and macro focus on, she'll be ahead of most people out there who have been happily taking photos for years without needing much of a clue.
If you insist on hearing a model, I have the Canon s90 and I like it. I almost got Panasonic's LX3 instead, and it would do nicely too.
posted by echo target at 12:38 PM on March 2, 2010
If you insist on hearing a model, I have the Canon s90 and I like it. I almost got Panasonic's LX3 instead, and it would do nicely too.
posted by echo target at 12:38 PM on March 2, 2010
For natural light, you want a wide aperture (small f/ number). I'm seconding the Canon S90, read the reviews, it is a stellar piece of gear.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 12:39 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by WinnipegDragon at 12:39 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
I am pretty much "nontechnical" when it comes to photography, and I have a Canon G11. I take photos of yarn and knitted items quite alot and I think it does a good job with macro mode and natural light. You can look at my Flickr page (see my profile) if you want to see what I've done with no real setup (just throwing things on the dining room table and snapping away).
posted by cabingirl at 12:44 PM on March 2, 2010
posted by cabingirl at 12:44 PM on March 2, 2010
Oops, I should also say that it's only my most recent pics (last few months) that I took with this camera.
posted by cabingirl at 12:47 PM on March 2, 2010
posted by cabingirl at 12:47 PM on March 2, 2010
The cheapest way to deal with low light is probably a tripod. Cameras that can take crisp close-ups in low light while being hand-held are going to be towards the pricier end of the range.
posted by jon1270 at 12:51 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by jon1270 at 12:51 PM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm siding with the Panasonic Lumix LX3 crowd. It's an amazing camera that has a very large lens for its size. That means your shots in available light are going to get a little more light into the camera. I have a dSLR and a Lumix and 90% of the time, I just reach for the Lumix.
As far as fiddling goes, all she has to remember is use macro mode for close up shots of knitting.
posted by advicepig at 1:44 PM on March 2, 2010
As far as fiddling goes, all she has to remember is use macro mode for close up shots of knitting.
posted by advicepig at 1:44 PM on March 2, 2010
You don't need to spend a lot of money on a camera to take great photos. I started out shooting with a little canon sd500 and was able to take great photos of my yarn and knitting projects with that (I'm also a sometimes knitblogger). I've since moved up to DSLR's because photography ended up becoming another hobby for me. I'll add another vote for the Lumix series of cameras but I'll add a reason - the bigger the lens, the better the camera (in your price range, at any rate). The lumix cameras in general have larger lenses than the typical point-and-shoot, and optically, the larger piece of glass gives you better, sharper photos.
That said, shooting in low-light situations will always be tricky. If you can't use a tripod to steady the camera, try using a beanbag or something to rest the camera on while shooting. Also don't ever use the flash, especially for closeup shots. If you learn only 3 "technical" things about using your camera learn these:
1) Macro mode, for shooting closeup details
2) White balance, which allows you tell your camera whether its shooting under fluorescents lights or outside on a bright sunny day (and correct for the different colours of light that result)
3) E/V or Exposure Value, usually represented by a +/- symbol, this will allow you adjust a photo to be slightly darker or lighter if the camera is automatically under- or over-exposing.
And finally, if you are hard on your things (and trust me, I am the same way) or tend to lose them, then don't spend your max. I just checked craigslist in my city for Lumix and found a whole bunch of options for around $100. That way, if it gets lost or damaged, you can just pick up another one instead of stressing about it.
posted by id girl at 2:33 PM on March 2, 2010
That said, shooting in low-light situations will always be tricky. If you can't use a tripod to steady the camera, try using a beanbag or something to rest the camera on while shooting. Also don't ever use the flash, especially for closeup shots. If you learn only 3 "technical" things about using your camera learn these:
1) Macro mode, for shooting closeup details
2) White balance, which allows you tell your camera whether its shooting under fluorescents lights or outside on a bright sunny day (and correct for the different colours of light that result)
3) E/V or Exposure Value, usually represented by a +/- symbol, this will allow you adjust a photo to be slightly darker or lighter if the camera is automatically under- or over-exposing.
And finally, if you are hard on your things (and trust me, I am the same way) or tend to lose them, then don't spend your max. I just checked craigslist in my city for Lumix and found a whole bunch of options for around $100. That way, if it gets lost or damaged, you can just pick up another one instead of stressing about it.
posted by id girl at 2:33 PM on March 2, 2010
I have a Fuji Finepix J150w. I am totally non-technical, but this sucker takes good pictures. It has a macro mode, as well as a bunch of others (including one for shaky hands.) I take a lot of pictures of close up stuff, including sewing and knitting and it works really nicely. My secret is to use a tripod. Oh yeah, I paid less than $200.
posted by TooFewShoes at 2:50 PM on March 2, 2010
posted by TooFewShoes at 2:50 PM on March 2, 2010
My camera is old now - it's a Canon AS710 - but it has a 1cm macro. When I replace it I wouldn't consider getting anything with a longer range.
posted by mippy at 5:43 AM on March 3, 2010
posted by mippy at 5:43 AM on March 3, 2010
Best answer: I have a canon G9, which has become the canon G11. I would not recommend the G11 for low light photography. Canon pushed the pixel density, so there's more noise at lower light levels.
It has a good macro mode & more control over the camera than your wife can probably care to deal with. It's also a very bulky camera. I also have a Fuji that's supposed to be good at low light photography, but there are a few issues that I think keep it from being a great low light camera.
I also have a Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR, which is supposed to be good at low-light (and can take very grainy photos where other cameras would struggle), but I'm not 100% happy with it for those purposes - though with some effort I can coax some breathtaking low light photos out of it, but nothing better than the G9, but only through going into manual mode & messing with the exposure controls, and I really dislike it for just about everything else - the only good thing about this camera is that you can take 8 second exposures with it and it has a sturdy metal body.
I'd like to get a Canon S90, but financially I just don't see it happening any time soon. From what I hear it's roughly equivalent to the G9, but compact. For my money, the S90 is the way to go. I'm sure it has a good long exposure setting, decent macro & takes great pictures at parties. You can set it up so that a single dial controls the exposure time and everything else is kept constant & just let her twiddle that knob until the EV meter reads zero.
Commenting on some of the above mentioned cameras. The Lumix LX3 has a fixed wide lens - recommending a camera without any zoom, even to a macro photographer, to someone who doesn't know what they're getting into seems to be to be a recipe for disappointment.
Whatever you get make sure it has:
a) a good macro mode
b) manual control over film speed & exposure length
c) is pocketable so you can use it for more than just kitting.
Other than that, I have two recommendations.
1. Learn to love a tripod. They make tiny tripods now, eve ones that are made out of small bean bags so the camera can rest at odd angles, or made with flexible legs that can grab on to things like table legs so you can get above things.
Also, get a small, pocketable camera (the G9 is not pocketable). The G9 will knock over small tripods or pull them down with its weight, and it's not as much fun to take out at night either because of its bulk.
2. Even if she's not into delving into the settings, there's no reason you can't set up Manual mode for her so that all she has to do once she's in it is twiddle a single knob for length of exposure until the exposure meter reads zero.
Oh, and if using a tripod or not, using the 2 second timer helps lessen camera shake from your finger pushing the button.
(I assume you understand everything I said since you mention 'f stops' in the question.)
posted by MesoFilter at 8:46 AM on March 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
It has a good macro mode & more control over the camera than your wife can probably care to deal with. It's also a very bulky camera. I also have a Fuji that's supposed to be good at low light photography, but there are a few issues that I think keep it from being a great low light camera.
I also have a Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR, which is supposed to be good at low-light (and can take very grainy photos where other cameras would struggle), but I'm not 100% happy with it for those purposes - though with some effort I can coax some breathtaking low light photos out of it, but nothing better than the G9, but only through going into manual mode & messing with the exposure controls, and I really dislike it for just about everything else - the only good thing about this camera is that you can take 8 second exposures with it and it has a sturdy metal body.
I'd like to get a Canon S90, but financially I just don't see it happening any time soon. From what I hear it's roughly equivalent to the G9, but compact. For my money, the S90 is the way to go. I'm sure it has a good long exposure setting, decent macro & takes great pictures at parties. You can set it up so that a single dial controls the exposure time and everything else is kept constant & just let her twiddle that knob until the EV meter reads zero.
Commenting on some of the above mentioned cameras. The Lumix LX3 has a fixed wide lens - recommending a camera without any zoom, even to a macro photographer, to someone who doesn't know what they're getting into seems to be to be a recipe for disappointment.
Whatever you get make sure it has:
a) a good macro mode
b) manual control over film speed & exposure length
c) is pocketable so you can use it for more than just kitting.
Other than that, I have two recommendations.
1. Learn to love a tripod. They make tiny tripods now, eve ones that are made out of small bean bags so the camera can rest at odd angles, or made with flexible legs that can grab on to things like table legs so you can get above things.
Also, get a small, pocketable camera (the G9 is not pocketable). The G9 will knock over small tripods or pull them down with its weight, and it's not as much fun to take out at night either because of its bulk.
2. Even if she's not into delving into the settings, there's no reason you can't set up Manual mode for her so that all she has to do once she's in it is twiddle a single knob for length of exposure until the exposure meter reads zero.
Oh, and if using a tripod or not, using the 2 second timer helps lessen camera shake from your finger pushing the button.
(I assume you understand everything I said since you mention 'f stops' in the question.)
posted by MesoFilter at 8:46 AM on March 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thanks so much for all the perspective. This really helps. Lotsa hivey love..
posted by martin2000 at 9:10 AM on March 3, 2010
posted by martin2000 at 9:10 AM on March 3, 2010
Mesofilter: The Panasonic LX3 does have zoom. Not a lot, but it is not a fixed lens. The G11 has the same resolution as your G9: Canon increased the resolution for the G10, but then reduced it for the G11. But even the G10 has good low-light performance, IMO.
posted by adamrice at 9:17 AM on March 3, 2010
posted by adamrice at 9:17 AM on March 3, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
I've handled both a G11 and an LX3 and I've been impressed by both of them. The images they capture seem film-like to me, in the best possible way. I haven't played with an S90, but from what I've read, it's outstanding.
These are all at the high end of your price range, but I think they're all in it.
posted by adamrice at 11:50 AM on March 2, 2010 [1 favorite]